Example of monogamy-only damage

[Bartato]

I had another thought

I wonder if lesbian "sexual activity" might be comparable to men french kissing other men .

I can't think of a Bible verse that explicitly tells men not to French kiss other men.

"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." (Leviticus 18:22 NKJV)

Clearly homosexual anal intercourse is prohibited, but it doesn't say anything about men standing or sitting and French kissing each other.

It's still a nasty, disgusting, worthless, stupid, and gay thing for men to do. We certainly wouldn't approve of it.

 

[MemeFan]

Of course do both. However, in this discussion, you are skewed way off in one direction - promoting polygyny - to the point that you are all-but-ignoring the unrighteousness of the situation, and thinking in a complete fantasy world where you assume all can be fixed with a wife-spanking. Another common theme for you.
Basically, just because it could potentially involve polygamy, you think it's great, and all the other details just have to be fixed in the simplest imaginable way. You are over-focussed on polygamy.

First, second wife is blessing. Remember, this guy is almost running away from blessing. WTF?

Second, what is wrong with his natural insticts? Whole problem exists because he avoids his insticts. I'm sorry, but wife is absolutely right here.

Third, there is trust issue which wife is working on.

Fourth, regarding authority. Spanking isn't "solution for everything", but in this case it will establish authority.

Five, he could easily fix whole issue just by:
1. Demand wife to stop sleeping with another women if this was done and is his will
2. If he think acquintance needs deeper checking do speed evaluation. He already knows her, so he can skip some steps.

It's unlikely acquitance is totally incompatible with wife. Radical feminists and tradwives aren't part of same social circle.

If he already likes acquitance he can just accept her as second wife and restore trust with first. And if he is neutral on acquitance, his insticts should be telling him potential another wife which should move him from my bad unfaithul wife towards messy potential situation (in sense trust restoratiom and what with acquitance) which will at least restore his marriage instead of having current mess.

6. Regarding lesbianism. C'mon, which man didn't dream of threesome? From all sexual situations husband/wife can do with another person this is least threat to their marriage. It's even less threathing than him finding new potential wife and going throught courtship ritual. He should sense that at least.

7. While you are here focused on authority and rightneousness, I'm most interested how to fix whole mess. Restoring authority and restoring trust is rather easy: wife will give him "I'm sorry", promise hellfire for repeating situation, give rather stern warning now or slight punishment to restore authority and demand activites which would restore trust (like wife informing him about everything she does with all other people) with wife's acceptance of control. Consistency of control is hardest part here.

Real issuse, according to me, isn't breaking wife's breaking authority (fixable as per above). It's his lack of trust in his insticts. At worst case they get divorced because wife has cheated him with another women. Hello, this is what is coming if his mind stay on her activities.

If his mind gets washed in proper testosterone dosage, it will move from wife's activities and toward does he wants acquitance as second wife. If yes, simple. If no, then wife needs education in his taste.

Any damage by sin, if done here, can't stopped by stopping sin. Stopping sin only stops additional damage. Only thing which matters now is what to do because now we have to create future. What's point of focusing on wrongdoing. Point of forgiveness is stop brain rumination of past wrongdoings.

Son, your ideas about relationships are going to need some refining.

Proper social wording is gentlemen. At 35 I'm too old to be called son except by my father.

What they say about war, “no plan survives first contact with the enemy”, is very apropos for your approach to the circumstance in question.

There is deeper reasoning behind.

This is a very messed up situation. While it isn't adultery proper, it is sexual misconduct. An analogous situation might be a husband going to prostitutes behind his wife's back. It isn't adultery proper since the prostitutes aren't married women, but it is still a serious problem for a number of reasons.

There is no analogus situation because woman-woman party time can never result in another child, whole any man-woman party time can.

 

[Michael Moon]

What was first in your mind when your read my previous post?

That the man was ignorant and acting too emotional (as evidenced by seeking advice from reddit's r/infidelity, which basically only ever gives the following answer: "DIVORCE NOW!!!"). I thought that polygyny could be a good way to fix the situation, but that it appeared the wife had gone behind the husband's back and was possibly being manipulative. She needed to be punished either way. I didn't put much thought into how as I try to take punishments very seriously and put time into thinking about them. As this is not my wife I decided to stop thinking about what the punishment should be because I was busy.

And what if boss is actually defective like lacking open-mindess and supporting initiative? And what forbids something and subordinate proves boss wrong? Is boss ego protection in order?

And subordinate has moral right to good boss.

And the wife needs to accept punishment when her husband deems it necessary.

Additionally, this line of thinking (that a wife could go behind her husband's back if the result is good) is dangerous to me. Where do we draw the line? How much deception do we allow? I appreciate cunning and can appreciate someone going against my directions to produce a better result... but I'm uncertain if I appreciate it more that obedience.

I think the situation between Rebekah and Isaac with regards to their sons' inheritance could start a discussion on that. I would be interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on that situation. Might need a new thread.

Here is food for thought:

Wife has single twin sister. When talking with husband, husband says one wife tis almost too much etc...

Wife still sends sister in husband's bed. Both finish pregnant. Is it OK for husband to disregard more resposibility now althought he has forbidden his wife to put him in "expanded rensposibility situation"?

I mean, the twin is his wife now. He cannot disregard her. His first wife also deceived him. The husband is the manager of resources. One wife very well may be too much for the family resources. Times are tough and she could have no skills.

An analogous situation might be a husband going to prostitutes behind his wife's back. It isn't adultery proper since the prostitutes aren't married women, but it is still a serious problem for a number of reasons.

I don't think this is a good situation to compare to that. This is a matter of authority and the actions of subordinates. Not something about informing your subordinates of any questionable conduct of the boss.

Everything about lesbianism... The Word doesn't take time to consider it worth talking about, so I think it genuinely just doesn't matter. A man can certainly be upset and disgusted by it or enjoy the practice between his wives and rejoice in it. Either way, probably best not to endorse or condemn.

 

[MemeFan]

This is slightly off topic, but as the topic involves "lesbian sexual" activity, I'll throw in my thoughts on the matter.

I know a lot of you are open to it. This is based on the fact that the Bible doesn't seem to directly prohibit it, like it does adultery and male homosexual activity.

There is something to that argument, but I still think you guys are off track. A lack of condemnation is not the same as affirmation. With polygamy, we have positive Divine affirmation.

Let's compare and contrast "lesbian sexual activity" with polygyny.

1. God made the woman for the man. She is his helpmate. Multiple women may serve one man, but they were made for the man, not for each other. This woman was not helping or serving her man by fooling around with another woman behind his back. It was instead a type of betrayal.

2. The vagina is obviously made for the penis, not for other vaginas. Penis plus vagina results in the creation of life, while vaginas themselves produce nothing. This woman was engaging in a foolish and fruitless activity.

3. We have positive descriptions of polygamy in the Bible, where God clearly affirms the legitimacy of that practice. We have no positive descriptions of lesbianism in the Bible.

4. The Bible tells us that many Godly men and women practiced patriarchal polygamy. Men like Gideon, David, and Jacob were unrepentant lifelong polygamists and were still commended by God as righteous men of faith. We know of no godly woman who engaged in female to female "sexual activity".

5. Romans chapter one might include a condemnation of female to female "sexual activity" (though I realize heterosexual anal sex might alternatively be in view there).

We have marriage descriptions and are sometimes informed who has slept with from. We are never informed about sexual practices. We don't know David or anybody else has done with his wives.

One per day, two per day, two per day at same time, we don't know.

Just as male-woman activity results in bonding so can woman-woman activity in same. It will be less than man-woman due to obvious reasons. More bonding is good.

 

[MemeFan]

That the man was ignorant and acting too emotional (as evidenced by seeking advice from reddit's r/infidelity, which basically only ever gives the following answer: "DIVORCE NOW!!!"). I thought that polygyny could be a good way to fix the situation, but that it appeared the wife had gone behind the husband's back and was possibly being manipulative. She needed to be punished either way. I didn't put much thought into how as I try to take punishments very seriously and put time into thinking about them. As this is not my wife I decided to stop thinking about what the punishment should be because I was busy.

And the wife needs to accept punishment when her husband deems it necessary.

Additionally, this line of thinking (that a wife could go behind her husband's back if the result is good) is dangerous to me. Where do we draw the line? How much deception do we allow? I appreciate cunning and can appreciate someone going against my directions to produce a better result... but I'm uncertain if I appreciate it more that obedience.

I read that good thinking is how big mistake is. Is it below waterline of ship or above.

Wife's deception can't stand, but there is also question of husband. If he has history of "going into rage", no wonder he has found it later. This is on him.

To me whole situation looks like good hit close above waterline, so sinking should be avoidable. But if stays focused on infidelity, he will dig hole into below waterline. In essence, self-torpedoing his family.

I think the situation between Rebekah and Isaac with regards to their sons' inheritance could start a discussion on that. I would be interested in hearing everyone's thoughts on that situation. Might need a new thread.

May be a good idea.

 

[Bartato]

Just as male-woman activity results in bonding so can woman-woman activity in same. It will be less than man-woman due to obvious reasons. More bonding is good.

That is actually part of the problem. Any "sexual type" bonding between the two women serves to weaken and undermine rather than strengthen the bond between the man and woman (especially here where the second woman currently has no marital connection whatsoever with the man). Loyalties should not be divided.

Here is another consideration. A married woman engaging in a separate and secret lesbian relationship seems analogous to a Christian man also practicing the religion of humanism. Christ demands our absolute and undivided loyalty. He will not tolerate divided loyalties.

Humanism is still spiritually unclean even though there is no "god" being worshipped beyond humanity itself.

 

[Michael Moon]

what is wrong with his natural insticts?

They have been locked behind culturally constructed guilt. He is a fool in the sense that he is ignorant.

Whole problem exists because he avoids his insticts. I'm sorry, but wife is absolutely right here.

Not quite, I think this is a conflation. There are two separate issues here. The wife could be right that polygyny is acceptable, but I seriously doubt the woman described here is telling him that HE would have a new woman. I think she is saying THEY could have a new woman. Which is an issue. The other issue is her going behind is back, which you get into next.

Third, there is trust issue which wife is working on.

Problem is she has broken his trust already. He does not trust her at this point. So, should he really trust this offer of him having another woman? We really don't have that much information to go on, but so far, the wife seems untrustworthy, if perhaps trying to fix that.

Five, he could easily fix whole issue just by:
1. Demand wife to stop sleeping with another women if this was done and is his will
2. If he think acquintance needs deeper checking do speed evaluation. He already knows her, so he can skip some steps.

Agree. He could do that. He could also tell his wife to stop rubbing what is his on some other woman and forbid contact. He has the authority to accept this woman. But he also has the authority to reject her.

It's unlikely acquitance is totally incompatible with wife. Radical feminists and tradwives aren't part of same social circle.

Women are weird, nothing here implies this is a good conservative Christian couple and the girl's Christian best friend. This is probably a random pagan "throuple" in the making. Which is not what I'm about. The wife seems to be offering Polyamory, not Polygyny.

7. While you are here focused on authority and rightneousness, I'm most interested how to fix whole mess. Restoring authority and restoring trust is rather easy: wife will give him "I'm sorry", promise hellfire for repeating situation, give rather stern warning now or slight punishment to restore authority and demand activites which would restore trust (like wife informing him about everything she does with all other people) with wife's acceptance of control. Consistency of control is hardest part here.

Real issuse, according to me, isn't breaking wife's breaking authority (fixable as per above). It's his lack of trust in his insticts. At worst case they get divorced because wife has cheated him with another women. Hello, this is what is coming if his mind stay on her activities.

If his mind gets washed in proper testosterone dosage, it will move from wife's activities and toward does he wants acquitance as second wife. If yes, simple. If no, then wife needs education in his taste.

Any damage by sin, if done here, can't stopped by stopping sin. Stopping sin only stops additional damage. Only thing which matters now is what to do because now we have to create future. What's point of focusing on wrongdoing. Point of forgiveness is stop brain rumination of past wrongdoings.

I don't have any issue with this. Your earlier posts just seemed to be conflating the idea of polygyny fixing this situation with the wife's actions being "right". I agree that he should probably take the other acquaintance (assuming he likes the acquaintance) into a trial period (where neither he nor the wife have relations with her) and if he chooses to, marry her, and sleep with her without his wife.

Proper social wording is gentlemen. At 35 I'm too old to be called son except by my father.

A man nearly twice your age can probably get away with calling you son.

 

[Bartato]

I read that good thinking is how big mistake is. Is it below waterline of ship or above.

Wife's deception can't stand, but there is also question of husband. If he has history of "going into rage", no wonder he has found it later. This is on him.

To me whole situation looks like good hit close above waterline, so sinking should be avoidable. But if stays focused on infidelity, he will dig hole into below waterline. In essence, self-torpedoing his family.


May be a good idea.

I agree that this isn't something that the man should divorce his wife over. Nonetheless, I think he is right to be really angry about it.

The hole is above the water line, but the Captain is still concerned.

 

[Bartato]

"The wife seems to be offering Polyamory, not Polygyny."

That's a good point Michael. She is offering him polyamory as a concession after being caught, not offering patriarchal polygyny.

Polyamory is filth

 

[Bartato]

Proper social wording is gentlemen. At 35 I'm too old to be called son except by my father.

There is no analogus situation because woman-woman party time can never result in another child, whole any man-woman party time can.

A wife giving blowjobs to other men would not result in children either, but still must not be done.

FWIW, Steve is in your father's generation, so I wouldn't take offense to him calling you son. Since I am only 50 I will not take such liberties.

 

[Bartato]

Everything about lesbianism... The Word doesn't take time to consider it worth talking about, so I think it genuinely just doesn't matter. A man can certainly be upset and disgusted by it or enjoy the practice between his wives and rejoice in it. Either way, probably best not to endorse or condemn.

That's part of the problem with the hermeneutical approach used by many here (I think especially the Torah Observance focused gentlemen). People think there has to be an explicit command for everything.

There actually is a place for logical extension of Biblical law. There is also a place for natural law.

The fact that God made woman for man, and told the two to be fruitful and multiply is itself an indication that stupid fruitless stuff like constant masturbation to porn and lesbianism are best avoided. They are in some way Creationally defective.

Marriage on the other hand is very good! Monogyny and polygyny are both legitimate forms of Biblically marriage. They are both natural, accord with creation itself, and bear good fruit (godly offspring as Malachi tells us)

Polyamory doesn't.

 

[steve]

Proper social wording is gentlemen. At 35 I'm too old to be called son except by my father.

I have children much older than you, but I can understand your feeling offended. I was talking down to you because of your tone of authority, which I found amusing.
How to say that I don’t know what I am talking about, without saying that you don’t know what you are talking about.

 

[Michael Moon]

That's part of the problem with the hermeneutical approach used by many here (I think especially the Torah Observance focused gentlemen). People think there has to be an explicit command for everything.

There actually is a place for logical extension of Biblical law. There is also a place for natural law.

Logical interpretation of and practice? Yes. Extension? Careful that doesn't become "adding to" the Law (or taking away from for that matter ).

 

[Bartato]

Logical interpretation of and practice? Yes. Extension? Careful that doesn't become "adding to" the Law (or taking away from for that matter ).

Implications would probably be a better word than extension.

 

[FollowingHim]

I think, given he's responded to everything else everyone has said but avoided answering my question, it is safe to assume that @MemeFan is unmarried. And 35. Sitting on his lonesome theorising about marriage over the internet and fantasising about having two wives.

If this is the case @MemeFan, I think you might have far more productive things to do with your time.

 

[MemeFan]

That is actually part of the problem. Any "sexual type" bonding between the two women serves to weaken and undermine rather than strengthen the bond between the man and woman (especially here where the second woman currently has no marital connection whatsoever with the man). Loyalties should not be divided.

This is assumption.

I have children much older than you, but I can understand your feeling offended. I was talking down to you because of your tone of authority, which I found amusing.
How to say that I don’t know what I am talking about, without saying that you don’t know what you are talking about.

You had issue because you tried to be diplomatic, not direct.

You can use direct style on me. I use it regularly on others.

I think, given he's responded to everything else everyone has said but avoided answering my question, it is safe to assume that @MemeFan is unmarried. And 35. Sitting on his lonesome theorising about marriage over the internet and fantasising about having two wives.

What will knowing my situation bring to this discussion?

Usually when people stop having good arguments they start looking towards something personal. And biggest advantage of pseudoanominity is moving conversation towards arguments strenghts, rather than personal likes/dislikes.

EDIT: And sometimes differences are driven by different values. Did anybody herr figured out thatvI don't consider wife's action cheating?So naturally I'm less sensitive to this aspect which you rest notice far more.

 

[MemeFan]

Thank Lord on your answer. Finally someone has insight.

Not quite, I think this is a conflation. There are two separate issues here. The wife could be right that polygyny is acceptable, but I seriously doubt the woman described here is telling him that HE would have a new woman. I think she is saying THEY could have a new woman. Which is an issue. The other issue is her going behind is back, which you get into next.

Women are weird, nothing here implies this is a good conservative Christian couple and the girl's Christian best friend. This is probably a random pagan "throuple" in the making. Which is not what I'm about. The wife seems to be offering Polyamory, not Polygyny.

This is really important. There is conflict of values. And who is really in charge and what will be hierarchy in potential future family.

Althought it would be good if polygyny is husband-wife "project", rather than just husbands. Actually, biggest issue could be this being wife's project now trying to recruit husband.

 

[Bartato]

Thank Lord on your answer. Finally someone has insight.


This is really important. There is conflict of values. And who is really in charge and what will be hierarchy in potential future family.

Althought it would be good if polygyny is husband-wife "project", rather than just husbands. Actually, biggest issue could be this being wife's project now trying to recruit husband.

You keep assuming that polygyny is potentially in view here. It almost certainly isn't. All we have is a woman engaging in improper relations with another woman who happens to say that the first woman's husband is attractive.

That means almost nothing. She would find an almost infinite number of men attractive.

 

[steve]

You had issue because you tried to be diplomatic, not direct.

You can use direct style on me. I use it regularly on others.

I have no issue.
You have an excellent grasp of the English language, enjoy learning the nuances.

 

[FollowingHim]

What will knowing my situation bring to this discussion?

A lot in this case. This is a marriage ministry. We exist to help people in their marriages. We give advice on marriage based on our own knowledge and experience.

@steve is twice your age, and has more experience of marriage than most men will gain in a lifetime - both success and failure. You will see him and I disagreeing on theology occasionally, but what you may not have picked up is that if I were to actually have marital problems which I needed advice on, @steve is one of a very short list of men whom I would be calling on the phone, because he knows what he is talking about and has made both successful choices and mistakes that I can learn from. Incidentally I'd take no offence at him calling me "son".

While I'm not much older than you, but I've been married for almost half my life, and never divorced, which I say not boastfully but purely to point out that I also know what I'm talking about, for different reasons.

When it comes to marriage, experience matters. People come here to learn about how to have successful marriages - and they will learn this most accurately from those people who have the experience to know what they are talking about.

On this matter, every other person in this conversation actually has experience with marriage - and everyone with experience is universally saying that this is a really bad situation (there is disagreement on details but the general reaction is similar). You stick out like a sore thumb, as the only person saying largely positive things about it - and apparently the only person without relevant experience so the only one who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

Point being, you should not be here telling @steve to call you a gentleman. You should be the one calling him "sir", sitting at his feet and humbly listening and learning from him - and from all the other men who have said similar things from their own positions of experience. Don't get me wrong, I'm not pushing you away, it's great to have you here @MemeFan, but if you truly don't know what you are talking about when it comes to marriage you should be listening more and saying less, as that means God has brought you here to learn.